Re: [7/10] [try 2] comctl32: Add basic structure for IImageList interface

[Henri Verbeet]

2009/8/11 Owen Rudge oru...@codeweavers.com:
 +static const IImageListVtbl ImageListImpl_Vtbl = {
 +ImageListImpl_QueryInterface,
 +ImageListImpl_AddRef,
 +ImageListImpl_Release
 +};
You can't do that, you need to at least implement stubs for the other methods.

Re: [7/10] [try 2] comctl32: Add basic structure for IImageList interface

[Owen Rudge]

You can't do that, you need to at least implement stubs for the other methods.


This is something I did in the following patch, mainly to reduce the 
size of the individual patches (based on the assumption all the patches 
would be committed at once anyway). I will recombine the patches into a 
single patch though if necessary.


Cheers,

--
Owen Rudge
http://www.owenrudge.net/

Re: [7/10] [try 2] comctl32: Add basic structure for IImageList interface

[Henri Verbeet]

2009/8/11 Owen Rudge o...@owenrudge.net:
 You can't do that, you need to at least implement stubs for the other
 methods.

 This is something I did in the following patch, mainly to reduce the size of
 the individual patches (based on the assumption all the patches would be
 committed at once anyway). I will recombine the patches into a single patch
 though if necessary.

Patch series aren't atomic, especially not when bisecting. A better
way to split things might be separating the classfactory and
IImageList implementation.

Also:
 +classinfo   *info;
This should probably be const.

 +if (!ppv) return E_INVALIDARG;
Any special reason for this check? MSDN claims it should return
E_POINTER, but most implementations don't bother checking at all.

As a personal preference, I don't think adding typedefs for structs
adds much. Arguably, the only thing it does is hide that something is
a structure.